Three recent books illustrate well the sheer diversity in
contemporary scholarship on that most
controversial of topics, Historical Jesus research. For those
not familiar with the key issues,
C. J. den Heyer's Jesus Matters provides a good
introduction. Its subtitle 150
Years of Research is something of a mystery - most would date
'modern' Jesus research
from the publications of Strauss (1835) or even Reimarus (1778),
both of which den Heyer
himself considers. But the book is well-written - it tells its
story in an attractive manner,
avoiding superfluous detail and punctuating the narrative with
the odd personal anecdote (e.g.
p. 150: Ridderbos's joking suggestion 'that we should vote on a
complicated exegetical
problem' provides a subtle comment on Funk's Jesus Seminar). The
author avoids the
increasingly popular trend of schematizing Jesus research into
three distinct 'quests' and so
manages to make each section flow naturally out of the previous
one. The discussion of
Bultmann and Käsemann (Chapter 7), in language that all can
understand, is exemplary.

Other important issues are covered, Nag Hammadi and Qumran,
Jewish portraits of Jesus and
the effects of Nazism on the scholarship, but one of the most
enjoyable parts of the book is
den Heyer's 'pause' for an 'unscientific "intermezzo"' (Chapter
10) which includes discussion
of Jesus in film and the sensationalist literature (Jesus in
India, Japan, not dying etc.). Recent
Anglo-Saxon scholarship is given special weight in the latter
part of the book and although
the author is not opinionated, he wisely implies a preference for
Sanders over Crossan. He
concludes with a 'mini-biography' of 'Jeshua of Nazareth' and
some reflections on the Gospels.

Jesus Matters is not perfect, of course. There is an
inevitable oversimplification (e.g.
p. 82, 'Neither evangelist is writing "history" but "theology"')
and the discussion of criteria
for Jesus research (Chapter 11) is probably too superficial to be
of much help. Further, it is
a great shame that given its virtues as an introduction to Jesus
scholarship, it has no Indexes
or Bibliography. (Return to top)

One area covered by den Heyer is the focus for Majella
Franzmann's thoroughly researched
Jesus in the Nag Hammadi Writings which works carefully
and methodically through
the Nag Hammadi texts, grouping material together according to
theme, 'Origin and Entrance
of Jesus' (Chapter 2), 'The World to Which Jesus Comes' (Chapter
3) and so on. Overall, this
will be a most useful resource for future students of the origins
and development of
Christianity. One cannot help having mixed feelings about
Franzmann's first chapter, though.
'It is no longer possible,' she claims, 'to assume uncritically
that the historical Jesus is the one
most closely aligned to the canonical Jesus' (p. 13). Given the
weight that Thomas receives
in much contemporary scholarship, this is partly true. But the
phrase 'the canonical Jesus'
(and others like it, throughout Chapter One) is unhelpful -
reputable scholars like Sanders,
Vermes and Meyer rely on 'canonical' material because of a
historical, not a 'confessional'
judgement and all sit lightly towards the 'canonical' John. (Return to top)

J. C. O'Neill'sWho Did Jesus Think He Was?, our third
Jesus book, is startlingly
different from the other two - and from all other contemporary
approaches. It is not often in
critical scholarship that one sees Origen (p. 175) and Athanasius
(p. 18) quoted to support
one's position. Nor is it usual to find the claim that 'Jesus
himself shared the beliefs about
the Messiah, the incarnate eternal Son of God, which are to be
found in the classical creeds
of the church' (p. 190), the climax of a book filled, by its
author's admission, with 'astonishing
conclusions' (p. 73).

The volume is, as one has come to expect from O' Neill,
highly-informed and marvellously
researched, providing along the way a wealth of interesting
insights and useful parallels.
What, though, of the fundamental argument? The book is arranged
in such a way that the
thesis becomes steadily less plausible as one progresses through
it. Thus, Chapter One - 'A
Basic Assumption' - provides a relatively weighty challenge to
the standard readings of Acts
2.36 and Romans 1.1-4; Chapter Two - 'Jewish Messianic
Expectations' - is a less convincing
but still useful corrective to literature like Judaisms and
Their Messiahs; Chapter
Three - 'the Hidden Messiah' - provides shakier ground for its
thesis; Chapter Four on the
Teacher of Righteousness (dies shamefully; was believed to be
Messiah; would come again
as Son of God / Melchizedek / God) will, I imagine, convince very
few; and Chapter Six, 'the
Trinity and the Incarnation as Jewish Doctrines' will persuade
nobody.

Nevertheless, the key section, Chapter Seven, from which the book
takes its title, provides a
brilliant subversion of the consensus position by arguing that
'What generations of scholars
have relied on to indicate that Jesus did not think he was the
Messiah, the silence of Jesus,
is part of the case for saying that he knew he was the Messiah.'
(p. 118). This is the most
bizarre thing about O 'Neill's case - he does not utilise the
Fourth Gospel (except to argue that
this too witnesses to Jesus' silence, Chapter Nine) but rather
makes his inferences precisely
from the lack of direct Messianic claims on Jesus' lips. Will
people buy this thesis? I doubt
it very much. Will people buy the book? I hope that they will -
it is a wonderful read. (Return to top)

New from T & T Clark are two books on the Corinthian
Correspondence, both in the 'Studies
in the New Testament and Its World' series. The first is by an
established scholar: A. E.
Harvey's Renewal Through Suffering is subtitled A Study
of 2 Corinthians
and focuses on 1.8, which refers to a traumatic, near-death event
in Paul's life. Harvey
speculates little on what actually happened but explores in
detail the probable effects on Paul's
character, theology and writing. Harvey's far reaching
conclusion is that 'for the first time,
certainly in Paul and possibly in the history of religious
thought - suffering is not regarded
as evil in itself, as something irrational or challenging to
faith' (p. 129). Harvey is non-
committal on the integrity of the letter but offers some useful
insights along the way,
especially a fresh reading of 1.15ff ('Paul was really talking
about money', p. 41). This is a
welcome study, a good companion to the author's seminal article
'Forty Strokes Save One'. (Return to top)

The second of the two is by a newly-appointed Lecturer in New
Testament Studies at the
University of Exeter. David G. Horrell's Social Ethos of the
Corinthian
Correspondence supplements other sociological approaches to
the New Testament by
applying Anthony Giddens's 'structuration theory' to 1
Corinthians, 2 Corinthians and 1
Clement. The conclusions are largely favourable to Paul -
'However aggressively Paul uses,
or attempts to use his personal authority, it is not used to
support the dominant social order
to promote the subordination of the weak' (p. 235) but less
sympathetic to 1 Clement in which
'The interests of the socially strong and the theological
resources of the Christian symbolic
order had formed a close alliance in the form of a powerful
religious ideology' (p. 295).
Although a revised version of a recent Cambridge University PhD
thesis, the book is
surprisingly easy to read (even if the word 'trajectory' appears
rather too often). A well-
researched and rewarding study. (Return to
top)

Another book from T & T Clark deserve mention - The Human
Condition, an English translation of Udo Schnelle's important
Neutestamentliche
Anthropologie: Jesus, Paulus, Johannes, published in 1991.
The translation seems to
have been well done but it is a shame that it gives all its
references to German originals even
when an English translation is available, not only for recent
books like Luz's Matthew 1-
7 (pp. 12, 21, 25 etc.) but also for classics like Jeremias's
Parables (pp. 27, 30
etc.) and Bultmann's Theology (pp. 47, 50, 51, etc.). (Return to top)

Also worth noticing is Luke T. Johnson's Scripture and
Discernment which takes
forward the author's work on the importance of 'narrative' for
the understanding of Luke-Acts
and applies these insights to the issue of Decision Making in
the Church. Part One
of the book ('Theory') is quite heavy-going and involves, along
the way, a dubious
understanding of 'midrash' (pp. 38-40). The reader might with
profit jump straight to Part
Two (Exegesis) where Johnson starts discussing Acts 10-15. The
theory is then applied in
Part Three (Practice) with some examples: 'Choosing between new
hymnals and a new heating
system may test the church's values in a powerfully searching
way. The way the members
express, by narrative, their experience of God in this church
will enable the community to
discern which of these choices best articulates its faith' (p.
136). Some will, no doubt, find
this book helpful; and scholars of Luke-Acts ought to enjoy the
discussion which makes up
Part Two. (Return to top)

Finally, the Festschrift for Moody Smith
distinguishes itself
from other honourary volumes
- Exploring the Gospel of John is not a hotchpotch of
unrelated articles of differing
quality. It focuses purely on the Fourth Gospel and includes
pieces by many of the heavy-
weights in the discipline, W. D. Davies, C. K. Barrett, J. Louis
Martyn, Alan Culpepper,
Eduard Schweizer, James Dunn and Wayne Meeks among them. This is
an important book
full of important contributions to research - Moody Smith must be
thrilled with it. (Return to top)